In many workplaces, online communication is now more common than face-to-face meetings.
Do the advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?
In recent times, technology has flourished from leap to bounds. People in the office prefer to have a conversation over the internet facility offered like email, web chat or video chat than in person. The reason behind such amendments are beneficial in many ways such as it is time and expense saving but at the same time can turn into drawback if the internet connection is poor. Such development has myriad merits and demerits can be solved.
Compared to earlier days now people have many means to communicate with others and it is time-saving as well as less expensive. This is simply because the invention of the internet has speed up the working standard to another level, the email can be documented for a longer time than the letters additional, takes less than a minute to reach the receipts with fewer expenses incurred like postal duty fee also the chances of losing the documents are more in a traditional method. For instance, it is been proven by The University of Cal Tech, that email conversation can be preserved for a longer duration and do not even get spoil like paper. Thus, it is a more trusted way to communicate in the professional domain.
Furthermore, the meetings on the application like Zoom or Skype are more convenient than making travel arrangements. This is one of the reasons why the conference on such a platform are fruitful compare to personal meetings. To illustrate further, as per the survey conducted by The Google 10 out of 10 people are in favour of online setup because a person can meet at their no flexibility they do not have to make any special arrangements.
Conversely, if the data connection is not up to the mark such practice becomes challenging and people might face distraction during the process. But this is not a major issue the same can be solved with better broadband connection and trail run before.
To conclude, people these days prefer to communicate via online services at the workstation since it is a time-saver, as well as inexpensive mode, compare to past. The benefits are saving to document and no travel needed for meeting the same can be arranged by the online application.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, furthermore, if, so, thus, well, for instance, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 13.1623246493 167% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 7.30460921844 14% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1781.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 370.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.81351351351 5.12529762239 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78515972293 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543243243243 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 580.5 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.5398846386 49.4020404114 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.733333333 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6666666667 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.93333333333 7.06120827912 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.164489415768 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0518081808043 0.084324248473 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.033467677393 0.0667982634062 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0848374328399 0.151304729494 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0344320057714 0.056905535591 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.0946893788 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.4159519038 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 78.4519038076 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.